Need a bit of career advice

that1surveyor, post: 429025, member: 2169 wrote: I don't often post here, but do lurk often. I've found this to be a very valuable resource of knowledge in numerous subjects. With all the experience here, I'm hoping to get a bit of advice. I'm a rather young surveyor, late 20s (a baby in our field) and hope to one day run my own business, but as of right now I've run into the first job offer that I've actually considered. On paper it's seems much better including a large raise, better hours, and a quite frankly easier job. The problem is the job is for a lets say less than reputable firm. I care deeply about this profession and really want to leave a mark in some fashion be it in an association or just through excellence. I just wonder if my reputation would be tarnished by this, even if I'm able to turn the place around. There are a number of other issues, but my question is what have you guys done to evaluate a job offer?

as i'm wont to do, i'll be the contrarian. take it. why not? i guess my line of thinking here is based upon a couple things: 1. looking back at how much time and emotional energy was spent trying to pick the "right" school for my then-kindergartener. 8 years- and two different schools- down the road and i can't believe how high the stakes seemed then, and how NOT high they seem in hindsight. and it then too was based upon a series of metrics that, had i known then..., are neither the whole truth nor in any way monolithic. you may well be able to effect change, and you certainly seem willing to do so. and besides- with whom is their reputation based? clients, or just other professionals? there are a number of companies around here who have terrible reputations among registrants, but keep work coming in like nobody's business. if that is the case, and is already in place- then it seems appetizing to me- i personally like the idea of the challenge of turning around a sinking ship than just being a cog in a team of relative all-stars. but that's me. 2. i'm 6 months into this very unique gig, and growing increasingly discouraged. not because of the firm's (in this case: "title company") reputation, not because of my work conditions or salary, or any internal pressures or personality conflicts. my current position has me reviewing other surveyors' work, and i'm finding i'm largely powerless to prevent a TON of sh*t work from entering the public record. (today, in particular, has me wanting to puke over a couple surveys i have to approve.) and i've already begun to talk to a couple people about relieving them of the duty of control of their longstanding firms. and, frankly, neither one has a particularly good rep locally as far as other surveyors go. but they both have established workloads, very favorable financial situations and established staff, and long lists of loyal clients. that saves me from having to dedicate a significant portion of my time and energy trying to bird-dog work, and can instead concentrate on surveying. the reputation is reparable. i've gone into firms as a tech, and then an SIT, and brought measurable improvement to procedures, basic comprehension of technology and standards of practice, and maybe even company attitude (way more subjective and likely me just patting myself on the back, idk).

i guess long story short is- why not give it a go? sounds like a chance to be well paid to learn the skill of cleaning up a mess, with relatively little to risk professionally. if it sucks after a while or becomes clear you can't change what needs to be changed, do something else. none of us are inert objects wholly incapable of effecting outcomes.

Why do they have that reputation, and if they can't keep good clients, how can they afford to pay so well?

[INDENT]1. They have that reputation because they cut corners at every important step in the process. Hit the courthouse & get the latest deed for the subject parcel.
[SARCASM] Forget adjoiners and any conveyances in the chain of title. No time for that. Corner search involves 30 seconds of waving a magic wand (Schonstedt) over the search coordinate stakeout. If no reading, call it lost. If you want to be a stickler and give the search a bit more time, spend 60 seconds. Bearing trees? Witness points? Expand search area or locate additional monuments to refine your search? Forget it! Time is money. Set a new pipe and move on, you have two more surveys to do this afternoon. When drawing the map, show the lines and points of your parcel. Field notes? Does anyone keep notes anymore? We keep things simple in the field. We don't keep notes, we set the DC to not record raw data because it takes up memory space for useless info, and we only use three point codes: TP (trav point), IP (whether set or found), and TS (topo shot). If the crew can't remember which points they set and which they found, don't sweat it, company SOP is to only call two type of mons "FIP" and "SIP", whether actually an IP, capped or not, a rebar, stone or nail, it don't matter. All are identified on the map as IP. And the symbols for FIP and SIP are so close in appearance that if you make them a little smaller, you can't really tell which is which anyway. If the crew located more than 2 monuments that are sufficient to establish a basis of bearing, don't show any except for those two. We're not in the business of doing other peoples surveys for them. But, if another firm already showed the whole section or several subdivision monuments on their map, just have the crew locate the two most convenient mons and transcribe the rest form your competitor's map and show everything as measured = record. Those fools did our surveying for us.

2. Forget the picky clients. They always demand a ridiculous amount of work and we always go over budget on those jobs and they're always fighting us on the extras while trying to backcharge us for bad staking. Well, geez, they should have let us know there was a problem before using the stakes. And then they wonder why we charge so many extras. Duh, if we didn't, there would be nothing to offset the backcharges and we'd go out of business. And if they wanted as many stakes as the snobby company across town always provides, and if they want cut sheets, then they should expect to pay more.

Yeah, we prefer the clients who are smart shoppers, looking for a bargain and knowing one when they see it. We can do a lot better by going through a ton of one-time clients than we can going to the effort to suck up to past big money clients just to get future work.

You need to get with the program man! It's part of our company mission statement and slogan that we're all about quality, the highest integrity and all that stuff, but hey, we should be able to do that on reasonable budget right? If not, we fall back to our real company slogan "caveat emptor". We gotta make a living, right? No one can blame us for that.

3. You need to be a team player and recognize where the profit potential is. If you don't learn to get off your high horse and insisting on doing all those extra steps at every stage of every job, you're going to be eating into the bottom line and hurting everyone at the company. If you don't learn the proper way to write a proposal, leaving out some oft overlooked services that a creative construction crew could manage to build without but most seem to want, then your proposed fees are going to be too high to bring in those wise bargain hunters. Without a steady stream of clients that we move through as quickly as we can, we've got no business! Besides, especially on the construction jobs, we rely on the extras to make a profit and to counter the backcharges.

4. You don't get any raises for the next ten years. What do you expect? We need the money to attract new talent because we're hiring all the time. And, how do you think we are able to stay so busy? It's because we are able to keep our (initial/quoted) fees low. How do you think we would be able to do that if we were giving out raises or bonuses every year? Besides, those employees who don't appreciate a steady job at a fast paced firm can just look somewhere else. We'll just get a replacement by dazzling them with a great starting salary, mentioning our 401K that we match on "good" years (although no one except the top management can recall the last time we had a year good enough to offer matching) and all our other window dressing benefits that we discourage employees from taking advantage of.[/SARCASM][/INDENT]

I worked for them (or some other version of the same outfit in another city somewhere) for a year once. Your better off staying where you are and/or waiting for an opportunity with an outfit with a good reputation.

Wow, weird stuff happens when one gets too sarcastic in these posts.

Every position has knowledge to gain. Even if that is the incorrect or less than ethical way. I've never been one to jump at money. My happiness (and now my family's) has usually been forefront. Secondary are adventure, new opportunities, and apprenticing/mentoring. Ultimately, I'm going to end up teaching somewhere. But, I just started my MGIS degree path, never think you're done learning.

As to other comments, I've never wanted to run my own business. That was never a goal. I imagine there are some of us out here that don't have entrepreneur in our blood.

Good luck on your choice.

A good job is like a good saddle. You'll know it when you see it and it will fit like a glove.

But then again I was once young and didn't think a good saddle was that big of a deal. I mean a saddle is a saddle, right? A couple of really hot and long days over rough terrain and the value of a good saddle will become apparent.

Evan, everything you said above is true, but I fear that is becoming the norm in the profession. Some rise to the occasion of doing a good job most of the time but they have a good out when they need it by comparing their work to the crappy norm. A lot of them hide within us by being a volunteer on various boards and committees while violating the code of ethics they volunteer to uphold. It seems it is more important to appear to be a professional than actually being one. Have a good weekend! Jp

paden cash, post: 429159, member: 20 wrote: A good job is like a good saddle. You'll know it when you see it and it will fit like a glove.

But then again I was once young and didn't think a good saddle was that big of a deal. I mean a saddle is a saddle, right? A couple of really hot and long days over rough terrain and the value of a good saddle will become apparent.

Dear Mr. Cash:

If you lose the phrase "rough terrain" and substitute "girl friend" for "saddle", I feel certain that we can publish this in the upcoming issue of "Surveying Digest". Please revise and resubmit. The check is in the mail.

flyin solo, post: 429118, member: 8089 wrote: 2. i'm 6 months into this very unique gig, and growing increasingly discouraged. not because of the firm's (in this case: "title company") reputation, not because of my work conditions or salary, or any internal pressures or personality conflicts. my current position has me reviewing other surveyors' work, and i'm finding i'm largely powerless to prevent a TON of sh*t work from entering the public record. (today, in particular, has me wanting to puke over a couple surveys i have to approve.)

Well, either the surveys meet minimum technical standards or they don't. Usually, the crappy surveys are a long ways from complying with standards and that fact is apparent upon the face of the work products, no further inquiry necessary.

What does "approving" a substandard survey really mean if not giving your opinion as a licensed professional that something that is obviously inadequate really does meet professional standards?

It means, lately, that a description can close mathematically, be locateable on the ground, and technically meet minimum standards, and still be a steaming pile.

It means red flags regarding somebody's judgment and/or execution of their duties in regard to boundary analysis can litter the face of the survey, but it still technically meets minimum standards- both by the letter (as opposed to the spirit) of the law, and as an insurable tract.

I don't like it, and I've gone WAY above and outside my job description to coax better work out of some people, but at some point various interested parties' interests settle on "good enough."

Short of turnstyling complaints to the board- which I have zero interest in doing- I'm coming to realize there's going to be more heartburn here than I counted on.

flyin solo, post: 429174, member: 8089 wrote: It means, lately, that a description can close mathematically, be locateable on the ground, and technically meet minimum standards, and still be a steaming pile.

It means red flags regarding somebody's judgment and/or execution of their duties in regard to boundary analysis can litter the face of the survey, but it still technically meets minimum standards- both by the letter (as opposed to the spirit) of the law, and as an insurable tract.

I don't like it, and I've gone WAY above and outside my job description to coax better work out of some people, but at some point various interested parties' interests settle on "good enough."

Short of turnstyling complaints to the board- which I have zero interest in doing- I'm coming to realize there's going to be more heartburn here than I counted on.

When you get into the weeds of what the Minimum Technical Standards provide, both as to research, boundary construction, and everything else, color me skeptical that the products you complain of actually meet all the requirements. I'd think that a title insurer accepting a survey product that clearly doesn't meet those standards would be an unhappy event for both the insurer and for bystanders.

I'll grant you that title insurance is written every day on substandard survey products. The claims resulting from them are an important part of my own livelihood, but my belief has been that if the title insurers only had a knowledgeable surveyor reviewing some of the work, they would greatly limit their liabilities by simply declining to write the enhanced policy extending coverage to delete the survey exceptions. I'm just wondering why that isn't the real bottom line in the situations you describe.

Knock yourself out. Just remember when push comes to shove, you can (theoretically) get another job, but not another license.

In defense, during the recession when jobs were scarce, some the shady places I started out in helped me gain experience of types of projects and helped me out later. Perhaps late 20's though is a time distance oneself from such shady activities. Can you really see yourself being there for 30 years? Or more like 3 with a bitter falling out?

One thing to remember. You can do years of good work, but the one job that blew up will be the one people will remember you for.

I took one job "for the money" with a firm like that and it was the worst professional mistake of my life. I worked there for a year and I regret every single day.

Reputation is everything in any profession. Stay where you are, build the rep, and eventually the money will come.

I was able to tell an attorney this joke:
What do attorneys and sperm have in common?
One in 300 million has the chance to become an actual human.

The attorney inherited a road. My client wants rights in the road to develop his land. The attorney lives on the road and would not want to be the reason those nice woods go away. His law partner told him to sell the house, sell the road and move somewhere else.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

It depends. Would you be coming in as a junior LS to the senior guy who makes all the rules and policies for the company, that probably led to the less than stellar reputation? Or would you be replacing that guy, and have the ability and consent of ownership to run things your way, and be able to make a better name for the company?

Don't do it. Look for a situation that raises your standards rather than you trying to raise theirs.

It depends. The standard surveyor's answer, of course.

Do you live in an area with three survey firms, thirty survey firms or three hundred survey firms within say a 100 mile radius of your home?

If there are only three firms, being known by many as being the worst isn't too bad. That might still be pretty darned good. But, if there are 300 firms and this one is known as being the worst, that is absolutely terrible.

Being the best or the worst is, of course, totally subjective. Is the label of "worst" known to the general client pool or is it more of an opinion expressed by competing firms.

BTW, when I was in the Second Grade, I was the top student in the class. My only other classmate was either number two in the class or the bottom of the class. It's all a matter of perspective.

Holy Cow, post: 429317, member: 50 wrote: BTW, when I was in the Second Grade, I was the top student in the class.

[USER=136]@James Fleming[/USER]

That is from my First Grade days when there were precisely four of us. We were excellent in mastering chaos. Mrs. Standley was such a wonderful teacher, I had her twice. (First and Second Grades)

Raybies, post: 429156, member: 9029 wrote: Every position has knowledge to gain. Even if that is the incorrect or less than ethical way...

I briefly worked at one of these type firms. I later told someone "I may not have learned what to do, but I certainly learned what NOT to do"